I have modelled a cube and i have a cylinder inside the cube. I want to assign two different sections for the cube and the cylinder. I am unable to select the cylinder to assign a section. The whole cube gets selected always. Could someone please help me?
The part must be partitioned into multiple regions and each one assigned the appropriate section.
If the part is 2D (for which the section would define the thickness), you will partition the face by any method that results in multiple faces
If the part is 3D, you must create cell partitions, since a region of a 3D solid is a cell. This can be done by tools-->partition, type: cell. To define more complicated regions, shape-->shell--->extrude, create a shell from sketch to extrude through the part (keep internal boundaries), then remove any face that isn’t part of a cell.
On the same (lat,long) on a Tableau-Desktop map, I want the size of a dot to be proportional to the number of records at that location. I tried count/sum(Number of Records) built-in tableau measure, I created a SeqId and tried count(SeqId) for Size, neither worked. Here is a sample of my data, as you can see:
(44.92810490,-74.89186500) has one Record
(44.69948730,-73.45291240) has five Records
(44.72143010,-73.72375280) has 10 records
I would like the point to be proportional to the number of records at that location. Help is Much appreciated
Musa
Seq Id,Census,Gender,Lat,Long
1,1860,F,44.92810490,-74.89186500
2,1870,M,44.69948730,-73.45291240
3,1870,F,44.69948730,-73.45291240
4,1870,M,44.69948730,-73.45291240
5,1870,F,44.69948730,-73.45291240
6,1870,F,44.69948730,-73.45291240
7,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
8,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
9,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
10,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
11,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
12,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
13,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
14,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
15,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
16,1870,M,44.72143010,-73.72375280
Can you try this?
Create a calculated field "Geo" with this definition
IFNULL(STR([Lat]),"")+ ","+IFNULL(STR([Long],"")
Move this field in "size" mark using Count([Geo])
Hope this should give you the desired result.
Put Latitude on the Rows shelf, and then right click on the pill and convert it to a dimension. Make sure it stays continuous.
Likewise, put Longitude on the Columns shelf and convert it to a dimension
Put SUM(Number of Records) on the size shelf
Important, Don't have any other dimensions on any shelves, leave SeqId off
This approach will make one mark for each unique latitude/longitude pair and size that mark according to how many times that pair appears in the data set.
A problem you will probably notice is that two latitudes that differ only in the final decimal place are treated as distinct latitudes. That may not make the most useful visualization. You can bin nearby latitudes together by making a calculated field to round values to the degree you wish. If you do that, be sure to make your field a continuous dimension, and also set its geographic role. It has the effect of snapping lat/long pairs to a grid. As an alternative to rounding, you can look into the hexbinx() and hexbiny() functions.
For a heat map based on square or hex grids, you may want to try using (partially transparent) colors instead of size to indicate density.
I'm in the process of evaluating Highcharts as a replacement for our current platform, and have some questions about how we can replicate one of our existing charts:
I've been able to recreate the basic floating stacked column chart, but need help with some of our specific features.
1) Is is possible to replicate the multiple y-axes with the columns displayed to the right of each within a single chart? If not, I suppose we could do 3 charts next to one another - and draw our own titles above (and data table below). If we go this route, is there a way to group all these elements in a single "container"? We need to export these charts to images and need to end up with a single image that looks like the one attached.
2) How would I create the inner box within each column? Do I need to draw it myself, or can I create another column series with a border and transparent fill and somehow set the width of the column to be less than the width of the main columns (note that the number of columns on each chart is dynamic, so the column widths can't be a fixed size. i.e. the inner box width needs to be a percentage of the main column width)?
3) Assuming #2 is possible, I could probably use the same technique to plot the horizontal line - just make the height 0 (or very small) and make the bar wider instead of smaller. Is there a better way?
4) How do I get the x coordinates of the columns so we can align our data table under each column?
5) Can I separate the individual points within the column. You'll notice in my jsfiddle, product 1 and product 2 are vertically aligned in the center of the column. Can I spread them out within each column as the 2 points are in the screenshot?
Thanks in advance for advice on all or any of the above.
Mike
1) You can use multiple yAxis, see the example
2) You can use renderer or mix column/column range and border parameter, example
plotOptions: {
columnrange: {
pointPadding:0.2,
color: 'rgba(255,255,255,0)',
borderColor: '#303030'
}
},
3) Use renderer, as above or scatter series with customied marker
4) Column is shape in point.element.graphic, so you can extract it.
5) as far as I know, it is not possible
I have a fusion table which combines markers and polygons. Sometimes the markers are layered below a polygon and are unclickable. Is there a way to force a marker to appear ABOVE the polygon, so both are clickable?
Example table ID: 3821195
Location is Toronto, Canada. If you zoom in tight, the marker is buried below the polygon.
I've experimented with creating different tables, entering the marker first, or entering the polygon first, but in some cases (eg the table above) the marker is alway underneath the polygon. How come, and how to solve?
Thanks,
Wendy
In the end I put the polygons in one table and the markers in another, and then stacked the layers with the polygon layer on the bottom.
This is the part of the script where the order of the layers were set:
layer1.setMap(map);
layer2.setMap(map);
layer4.setMap(map);
layer3.setMap(map);
First one listed is on the bottom. Last one listed is on the top.
Hope this helps somebody else.
I am creating a map in which i want a polygon to display two separate variables within it. Therefore I want a stripped polygon relating to both the keys from the separate factors however I have no idea on how to do this. I messed around with multiple attributes on the properties section and could get the two variables up however could see no way of making the polygon display them both.
Thank you, any help would be appreciated
This is partially manual, but you are going to have to make a separate category within one of the fields that identifies the multivariate features. You could also create a new layer that is a selection of these features. Once you have that, go to the layer properties and display the features as 'Categories - Unique values, many fields' and hit the 'Add All Values' button. Once the categories are populated select the one you are interested in and pick a hatched symbol such as 'Radiation Overlay'. Then go to the Symbol Property Editor (double-click the symbol) and modify the two layers that make up the hatched symbol. You need to adjust the color, line thickness, offset, etc. until you get it to look the way you want. Probably not as auto as you wanted, but it will satisfy display purposes.